Jump to content

.justin

Dirt Lot 0'
  • Content Count

    45
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

33 Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Yeah they were just doing joint repairs on the bridge. I imagine when the building construction starts in earnest the northbound curb lane will close.
  2. Yeah that's a good example of what Columbus should be doing but isn't. Even in the Short North on the section of High St that was just rebuilt, they have put down standard parallel lines at signalized intersections and no markings or signage at most unsignalized intersections. (There are only two crosswalks at unsignalized intersections that do have markings and signs, and one of those has a rapid flashing beacon)
  3. I don't want to take this thread off-topic so I started a separate thread to discuss this:
  4. Starting a new thread on this so as to not take a separate thread in the Columbus development forum off topic: This bothers me so much. An anecdote: The city added crosswalk markings along Thurman Ave in German Village this summer after repeated requests from the south side commission, but they only added basic parallel lines. I requested through 311 they add high-visibility markings at one intersection (and signs, but I'd be happy just with the markings) and after two months they responded saying that upon further review, the Division of Traffic Management recommended no changes. What's ridiculous is that the city joined NACTO last year and specifically did so to show its commitment to implementing best practices from the NACTO Urban Street Design Guide -- it says as much on their Complete Streets page. The problem they haven't actually implemented even the most basic best practices, because a critical recommendation for crosswalks in the guide is to use "high­-visibility ladder, zebra, and continental crosswalk markings" over standard parallel lines. I for one would absolutely support any means of pressuring the city to actually paint proper crosswalks.
  5. So the Columbus Underground article says that the proposal includes the parking lots both north and south of the bank building: "Included within the footprint of the proposed development is a former bank building at 66 S. Third St., the two parking lots to the north and south of that building, and a large parking lot on South Fourth Street, north of the YWCA." It also says the development will be 3 acres (as does the Dispatch), which would have to include that parking lot. (34 South Third is owned by Capitol Square)
  6. Yep - it's going in the new building that replaced Grandview Mercantile at 1st & High:
  7. The new exit ramp to Parsons from 70 EB replaces the exit ramp to 18th St from 70 EB. It will should be opening the same time the 18th St exit closes. (From what I understand, due to hospital access requirements the 18th St exit cannot close until the new Parsons Ave exit opens) Once the 3rd St ramp closes in November, there will not be a direct on-ramp to 70 EB from downtown until summer 2021.
  8. All of the letters were back up when I passed by this past Saturday, but as of this morning the M had gone missing again.
  9. Yes, they came to an agreement that keeps the bar for now but also allows the site to be redeveloped "someday" - https://www.dispatch.com/article/20160417/ENTERTAINMENT/304179886
  10. Yes - the guidelines can be downloaded from this page: https://www.columbus.gov/Templates/Detail.aspx?id=67372#GVg (note the guidelines document is a ~100MB PDF)
  11. Plan is to start playing games in the new stadium in July 2021, playing the first half of the season at Mapfre.
  12. Are you sure the first phase didn't include any affordable units? This article from the Dispatch says "Casto’s River and Rich project will have 230 units, 50 of which must be 'affordable housing.'" Did that change?
  13. Half of the land that Gravity 2 is being built on was owned by Nationwide and sold to Kaufman (mentioned in this article).
  14. This is all the article says about the commissioners: "Commissioners were favorable to the project on a first review."
×
×
  • Create New...